Sherlock Holmes (Stoll film series)

From 1921 to 1923, Stoll Pictures produced a series of silent black-and-white films based on Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories. Forty-five short films and two feature length films were produced[1] featuring Eille Norwood in the role of Holmes and Hubert Willis cast as Dr. Watson with the exception of the final film, The Sign of Four, where Willis was replaced with Arthur Cullin. Consequently, Norwood holds the record for most appearances as Sherlock Holmes in film.[1][2]

Production

Sir Oswald Stoll, an Australian-born Irish theatre manager[1] ran music halls and West End stages until WWI when he segued into film production.[1] Beginning in 1919, Stoll opened a series of cinemas and purchased a disused aircraft factory to create the then-largest film studio in Britain.[1]

In 1920, Stoll purchased the rights to produce films based on Sherlock Holmes' tales from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.[3] Stoll embarked on the production of his first series of fifteen short films entitled The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes in 1921.

The films were directed by Maurice Elvey[3] and then-59-year old actor Eille Norwood[3] was chosen to portray Sherlock Holmes with Hubert Willis cast as Dr Watson.

Norwood was obsessed with portraying Holmes true to the written stories.[4] He re-read all the stories published up to that time[4] and even learned to play the violin.[4] Norwood had a reputation as a very professional actor with an incredible ability with make-up and disguise.[5] There is a story that when Elvey asked Norwood to do an impromptu screen test, Norwood excused himself to the dressing room and appeared a few minutes later an entirely new person.[4]

He had done very little in the way of make-up, and he had no accessories, but the transformation was remarkable – it was Sherlock Holmes who came in that door.[4]

The initial series of fifteen shorts entitled The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes was so successful, that Stoll moved to film a feature length adaptation of The Hound of the Baskervilles also in 1921.

Unlike Adventures, The Hound of the Baskervilles was less faithful to the original story.[6] While film critics such as The New York Times were less than enthused with the adaptation, Doyle enjoyed it claiming "On seeing him [Eille Norwood] in The Hound of the Baskervilles I thought I had never seen anything more masterly."[6]

Critical success returned with the second instalment of fifteen short films entitled The Further Adventures of Sherlock Holmes in 1922. Elvey was replaced as director by George Ridgwell.[7] Arthur Bell, who had portrayed Inspector Lestrade in some of the Adventures shorts had died of heart disease in 1922.[7] For the Further Adventures, Bell was replaced by Teddy Arundell as Inspector Hopkins.[7]

A final collection of fifteen shorts was released in 1923 entitled The Last Adventures of Sherlock Holmes. The series was successful enough to spawn one last feature length film, The Sign of Four released later in 1923.

The Sign of Four featured a return of Elvey to the helm and the replacement of Hubert Willis with Arthur Cullin as Watson. Elvey considered Willis too old to play a romantic interest for Mary Morstan.[8] Cullin had earlier assayed the role in 1916's The Valley of Fear opposite H.A. Sainstbury's Holmes.

Cast

Films

Short films

The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes

The Further Adventures of Sherlock Holmes

The Last Adventures of Sherlock Holmes

Feature length films

Reception

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle himself praised Norwood's performance in the role of his creation.

He has that rare quality, which can only be described as glamour, which compels you to watch an actor eagerly even when he is doing nothing. He has the brooding eye which excites expectation and he has also a quite unrivaled power of disguise. My only criticism of the films is that they introduce telephones, motorcars and other luxuries of which the Victorian Holmes never dreamed.[5]

Vincent Starrett stated that while the Stoll films were a little slow, their fidelity to the source material often surpassed later more elaborate adaptations.[9]

Bioscope claimed that "As popular attractions, The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes are, in our opinion, considerably the best things yet shown by Stoll."[10]

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Alan Barnes (2002). Sherlock Holmes on Screen. Reynolds & Hearn Ltd. p. 13. ISBN 1-903111-04-8.
  2. ↑ "On the trail of the cinematic Sherlock Holmes". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 2012-01-01.
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 Allen Eyles (1986). Sherlock Holmes: A Centenary Celebration. Harper & Row. p. 62. ISBN 0-06-015620-1.
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 Alan Barnes (2002). Sherlock Holmes on Screen. Reynolds & Hearn Ltd. p. 14. ISBN 1-903111-04-8.
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 Vincent Starrett (1993). The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes. Otto Penzler Books. p. 156. ISBN 1-883402-05-0.
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 Alan Barnes (2002). Sherlock Holmes on Screen. Reynolds & Hearn Ltd. p. 61. ISBN 1-903111-04-8.
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 Alan Barnes (2002). Sherlock Holmes on Screen. Reynolds & Hearn Ltd. p. 53. ISBN 1-903111-04-8.
  8. ↑ Alan Barnes (2002). Sherlock Holmes on Screen. Reynolds & Hearn Ltd. p. 172. ISBN 1-903111-04-8.
  9. ↑ Vincent Starrett (1993). The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes. Otto Penzler Books. pp. 156–157. ISBN 1-883402-05-0.
  10. ↑ Alan Barnes (2002). Sherlock Holmes on Screen. Reynolds & Hearn Ltd. p. 15. ISBN 1-903111-04-8.